2) This short ‘Earth & Environment’ feature in Science News makes a very interesting argument about whether or not neonicotinoid-tainted crops are damaging honeybee colonies and other wild pollinators by poisoning the bee’s input, which in turn, harms the output. Because honeybees do not have a sufficient amount of taste receptors to detect foreign aliments in tainted pollen, they are unable to distinguish between pesticide-infected pollen, and safe untreated pollen.
Nicotine, the main macromolecule within neonicotinoids, is worrisome for most scientists who’re currently studying this starling topic. The nicotine binds to the bee’s cells and makes the bees more prone to choosing the addictive crop than non-tainted alternatives. Many beekeepers and studies are suggesting that colonies that have pollinated neonicotinoid-infected plants, are suffering from rapidly declining colony populations. However, there are not many studies within this specific topic area, making many test results unreliable and juristically different compared to others.
The last argument this article makes is if honeybees are using pesticide-infected pollen, then does that taint …show more content…
I’ve scoured numerous websites, videos, blogs, articles, and documentaries about honeybees and their grim future on planet Earth. This past knowledge first drew me to this article and provoked my interest to chose this topic as my Critical Review #2. Along with my strictly organic, non-GMO, fresh and local diet, I am an avid honey consumer, and I personally care about what the future will hold for honeybees. All of this combined knowledge led me to effectively understand the grammar and terminology used in this article, which further provoked my interest within this